Em Tue, 19 Feb 2013 12:43:46 +0100
Borislav Petkov <b...@alien8.de> escreveu:
> On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 08:11:49AM -0300, Mauro Carvalho Chehab wrote:
> > > > I remember I saw some discussions about it in the past at bluesmoke ML,
> > > > saying that -ENODEV is the expected behavior when this is not supported.
> > > >
> > > > Changing from -ENODEV to "N/A" will break anything that would be relying
> > > > on the previous behavior. So, I think that such change will for sure
> > > > break
> > > > userspace.
> > > >
> > > > If we're willing to change it, not creating the "sdram_scrub_rate"
> > > > sysfs
> > > > node is less likely to affect userspace.
>
> This will break scripts which assume this file's presence implicitly.
If are there any script like that, then yes.
> [ … ]
>
> > @@ -1017,6 +1010,14 @@ int edac_create_sysfs_mci_device(struct mem_ctl_info
> > *mci)
> > return err;
> > }
> >
> > + if (mci->set_sdram_scrub_rate && mci->get_sdram_scrub_rate) {
>
> This will break cpc925_edac.c because it defines a
> ->get_sdram_scrub_rate but not a ->set_sdram_scrub_rate.
True. Patch below fixes it.
> I think a maybe better fix would be to figure out the sysfs file
> permissions based on the presence of the two functions and *then* add
> the attribute.
>
> This way, the only visible change to userspace is the corrected sysfs
> file permissions.
I'm not sure if is there a way to pass fs permissions to something similar
to device_create_file().
On both cases, an error will happen at open:
- if file doesn't exist (this approach), it will return -ENOENT;
- if file is opened with wrong permissions, open will return -EPERM.
However, if the file is not created, readdir() won't show the file.
So, if userspace first seeks for the sdram_scrub_rate, it won't fail.
That makes the logic below a little safer, IMO.
[PATCH EDAC] edac: only create sdram_scrub_rate where supported
Currently, sdram_scrub_rate sysfs node is created even if the device
doesn't support get/set the scub rate. Change the logic to only
create this device node when the operation is supported.
If only read or only write is supported, it will keep returning -ENODEV
just like before.
Reported-by: Felipe Balbi <ba...@ti.com>
Signed-off-by: Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@redhat.com>
diff --git a/drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c b/drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c
index 9c58da6..29b66a2 100644
--- a/drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c
+++ b/drivers/edac/edac_mc_sysfs.c
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@
*
* Written Doug Thompson <nor...@xmission.com> www.softwarebitmaker.com
*
- * (c) 2012 - Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@redhat.com>
+ * (c) 2012-2013 - Mauro Carvalho Chehab <mche...@redhat.com>
* The entire API were re-written, and ported to use struct device
*
*/
@@ -882,7 +882,6 @@ static struct attribute *mci_attrs[] = {
&dev_attr_ce_noinfo_count.attr,
&dev_attr_ue_count.attr,
&dev_attr_ce_count.attr,
- &dev_attr_sdram_scrub_rate.attr,
&dev_attr_max_location.attr,
NULL
};
@@ -1017,6 +1016,14 @@ int edac_create_sysfs_mci_device(struct mem_ctl_info
*mci)
return err;
}
+ if (mci->set_sdram_scrub_rate || mci->get_sdram_scrub_rate) {
+ err = device_create_file(&mci->dev,
+ &dev_attr_sdram_scrub_rate);
+ if (err) {
+ edac_dbg(1, "failure: create sdram_scrub_rate\n");
+ goto fail2;
+ }
+ }
/*
* Create the dimm/rank devices
*/
@@ -1061,6 +1068,7 @@ fail:
continue;
device_unregister(&dimm->dev);
}
+fail2:
device_unregister(&mci->dev);
bus_unregister(&mci->bus);
kfree(mci->bus.name);
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
